Jeff’s Take

Jeff sounds about as depressed as I am.  I should note that my mind is not yet made up about what to do, but you’ll all be exposed to my thought processes as time wears on, in all it’s horror.  Jeff says:

Here’s an unpleasant prediction: Hillary or Barack will be the next president. Watch for “sensible” gun control laws to strip away our remaining rights. Better stock up on incandescent light bulbs ’cause they’ll be illegal, too. Kiss trans-fats goodbye.

I think we have to seriously start considering the prospect of what a Obillery presidency will mean for us, and start preparing for it.   I’m not seeing energized Republicans out there, I’m seeing Republicans who are already acting like the 2008 election is lost now that Fred is out.  The big question I will be asking myself over the next few months is whether there’s any real difference between McCain and Romney that warrants me not throwing my vote away.  In the general election I’ll be asking the same thing compared to Obillery.

I am willing to throw my vote away in either a protest vote, or leaving the presidential ballot unchecked.  But I will have a powerful incentive against doing so considering who the Democrat will be.  I’m willing to be wooed.

11 Responses to “Jeff’s Take”

  1. Nate says:

    Ron Paul called…he is willing to do some wooing!
    Just kidding.

  2. Sebastian says:

    Oh, Ron can woo. I might be pissed off enough by the time Pennsylvania’s primary rolls around to vote for him. But I wouldn’t kid myself that I’d be doing anything other than protesting by throwing my vote away.

  3. Nate says:

    How about instead of NOT voting, throw your vote away on Ron Paul? If we get enough people to do it, we may just get the only candidate who is better than McCain now that Thompson is out.

  4. Sebastian says:

    That’s a possibility. But I can promise you it won’t push Ron Paul over the top.

  5. straightarrow says:

    I think the situation is not “Is there any real difference between McCain and Romney?” but rather, “Is there any real difference amongst the four, McCain, Romney, Clinton, Obama?”

    I can’t see enough difference to worry about.

  6. dwlawson says:

    We gotta teach the Republican party a lesson. If you accept their pap, you be fed more next time.


  7. Sebastian says:

    The problem is, parties aren’t people. You can’t teach them lessons. They are civic institutions, and it’s very difficult for civic institutions to change through failure. What have the Republicans learned from their lesson in 2006? The way you change things is to work hard within the party to get the candidate you consider favorable elected. That means joining the party, and working at the local level to get candidates you like elected.

  8. dwlawson says:

    The problem is, parties aren’t people. You can’t teach them lessons.

    Really? Seems to me the democrats were and are still stepping very gingerly with respect to the desires of a particularly vocal voting bloc.

  9. Sebastian says:

    I’m not convinced the Democrats have given up on gun control. Obillery don’t seem to have too many problems supporting the assault weapons ban which Bill Clinton blamed for their loss of Congress in 1994. You’re right that the Democrats have stayed quiet on the issue, but much of that has to do with the fact that gun owners managed to alter the political landscape of the issue.

    I’m not arguing that the political parties are unalterable, they can be changed, but it takes more than bolting the coalition to do that. The Democrats won in 2006 on the backs of pro-gun blue dogs, so keeping quiet on the gun issue is a matter of political expedience for them. I’m not convinced, collectively, the Democrats have learned much in their defeat so far on guns.

    What’s being argued by many is to “teach the Republicans a lesson” by making them lose, which will cause them to come crawling back to gun owners on their hands and knees after they realize they can’t win without us. But how will that happen if there’s no one in the Republican Party helping promote pro-gun candidates from within? Gun owners splitting the coalition could possibly kill the Republican Party. We may have the power to do that. But in doing that, we’d be effectively setting fire to our own political power.

    Sure, the parties may go through realignment, with new coalitions forming, and gun owners may play a big part in that. But they also might not. Abandoning the Republican Party, as much as I can’t stomach them at times, will be slitting our collective wrists. There are ways to change the Party, if gun owners are willing to put in the hard work to change it, and it does need to be changed, but I think everyone needs to realize that staying home won’t teach the Republicans anything.

  10. dwlawson says:

    But I’m not staying home. I tried that for years and all they said was people were apathetic. I was disillusioned even before gun rights entered my radar.

    I’m voting (early for the primary and I’m voting for Ron Paul.

  11. Sebastian says:

    What happens when he doesn’t win the nomination? I’m not going to fault anyone for voting for Paul in the primaries.